This is a very nice idea, I'll put it on my particles todo-list :)
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:01:23 +0300, Damir Prebeg
wrote:
> Well, I'm not a programmer so I don't know how hard would that be for
> implement, but I think that some kind of hair density option instead
> of current overall amount
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:06:18 +0300, Carsten Wartmann
wrote:
> Am 30.03.2011 12:29, schrieb Janne Karhu:
>> Revision: 35896
>>
>> http://projects.blender.org/scm/viewvc.php?view=rev&root=bf-blender&revision=35896
>> Author: jhk
>> Date:
t; On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Janne Karhu wrote:
>> Revision: 35755
>>
>>
>> http://projects.blender.org/scm/viewvc.php?view=rev&root=bf-blender&revision=35755
>> Author: jhk
>> Date: 2011-03-24 17:15:43 + (Thu, 24 Mar 201
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 04:53:46 +0200, Alex Fraser wrote:
> We have been using the SPH solver for engineering simulations. In our
> experiments, we often vary the fluid interaction radius independently
> from the collision radius. For example, if the size of a hole in a
> container mesh change
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 00:57:39 +0200, Michael Fox wrote:
> i don't like how size is now being used as ui tend to use "size deflect"
> with some random size which means if i increase the size, hence the
> radius then the particles will float above the collision object.
I've used size deflect in pre
I've been refactoring the fluid particles recently, and before I actually
start getting ready to commit this I'd like to get some feedback on my
current progress and ideas.
http://code.blender.org/index.php/2011/02/particle-fluids-refactoring-under-way/
And yes I do know that this will break
ed to the selector soon).
janne
On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 23:08:33 +0200, Carsten Wartmann
wrote:
> Am 08.02.2011 21:22, schrieb Janne Karhu:
>> Carsten: The placement of the actual context menu is still under
>> debate. I
>> originally had the menu in the old location of the
the material context button to match the order in the button row
> above.
> Also, I thought the buttons were perhaps a bit small, I didn't see them
> at
> all to start with.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug.
>
>
> On 8 February 2011 15:24, Carsten Wartmann wrote:
>
>
Already reopened, but for the future commenting on the closed report will
do just fine.
janne
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:00:04 +0200, Remo Pini wrote:
> Hi all
>
> If I think a bug has been closed in error (#23820), is there a way to
> have it reopened?
>
> Cheers
>
> Remo
>
> ___
Yes I agree pretty much fully on what you've written. The whole particle
system is still really quite crippled from the jump from 2.49 to 2.5 and I
haven't even wanted to start reimplementing certain features over (such as
effecting particle properties with particle time and reactor particles
26:20 +0200, Damir Prebeg
wrote:
> When you say "..how much the density..." do you mean on Density setting
> on
> Flow object?
>
> Regarding parameter name, Gravity could be called Smoke Weight or
> something
> similar...
>
> On 8 November 2010 12:09, Jann
Hmm, indeed this is not very logical. The "gravity" and "heat" parameters
actually change how much the density and heat of the smoke effect the
motion of the smoke, so they're not directly connected to gravity. I'll
change the parameter name and add a bit more descriptive tooltips to both
o
This is not currently possible in 2.5 as it was a part of the old ipo
system and I haven't yet reimplemented the functionality. The reason I
haven't yet reimplemented it that I think the possibilities are far
greater than just changing parameters in global vs local time, but I
haven't yet h
2010 at 10:29 PM, Janne Karhu wrote:
>> Log Message:
>> ---
>> Fluid physics for particles by Raul Fernandez Hernandez (Farsthary) and
>> Stephen Swhitehorn:
>
> Hi, this is interesting stuff, curious to take a look at it. How much
> likelihood is there
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:15:27 +0200, Lukas Tönne
wrote:
> Either way it's very ugly and imo a problem with the current particle
> system design (before you start shouting, i know particles will be
> redesigned some time and there are more important things atm, so this
> is just a theoretical que
Apparently tortoise svn doesn't like accented characters so a proper
credit about the patch to: Raul Fernandez Hernandez (farsthary).
jahka
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committer
The overall idea looks nice, but the patch isn't complete. For example the
oldpos and diff vectors aren't declared anywhere and oldpos isn't even
defined in the patch. Besides isn't oldpos just pa->prev_state.loc? I'd
also like to see vector macros used in the calculation like with the other
17 matches
Mail list logo
